Can't remember what I was so eager to blog about just now, since the page had trouble loading. Yeah, I was going to e-mail Richard again, just to prove how "indulgent" he can be :). I suppose the core of my essay will still be the same, using Larsen to make the case for a demarcation of focalisation, narration and an implied author (or textual intention/meaning). What's changed though, is I'm convinced that in doing so I must not fall into the essentialist trap of arguing for a unitary notion of a text. Hence all the bringing in of Hernstein Smith talking about social interaction and just generally things about how the text is constituted as cultural artifact. The act of interpretation within this schema is dependant on recognising the conventions of the social communication - specifically that the text addresses itself as text rather than as voices within the story world.
Can't remember what I was
